ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
RECEI~VED
CLERK’S OFFiCE
APR 302003
COUNTY OF KANKAKEE,
~NKAKEE, and WASTE
ILLINOIS, INC.
Petitioner,
COUNTY OF KANKAKEE, COUNTY BOARD OF
KANKAKEE, and WASTE MANAGEMENT OF
ILLINOIS, INC.
Respondents.
MICHAEL WATSON,
Petitioner,
vs.
COUNTY OF
KANKAKEE, COUNTY BOARD OF
KAN~(AKEE,
and WASTE
MANAGEMENT OF
ILLINOTS, INC.
Respondents.
Petitioner,
COUNTY OF KANKAKEE, COUNTY BOARD OF
KANKAKEE, and WASTE MANAGEMENT CF
ILLINOIS, INC.
Respondents.
WASTE MANAGEMENT OF ILLINOIS, INC.,
COUNTY OF KANKAKEE,
Petitioner,
SIATE OF
(LLINOLS
PCB
03_12~0h1utton
Control Board
(Third—Party Pollution Control
Facility Siting Appeal)
Facilii:y Siting Appeal)
(/)
CITY OF
KANKAKEE,
vs.
Petitioner,
COUNTY BOARD OF
MANAGEMENT OF
Respondents.
MERLIN KARLOCK,
vs.
POE 03—133
(Third—Party Pollution Control
KEITH RUNYON,
vs.
PCB 03—134
(Third—Party Pollution Control
Facility Siting
Appeal)
PCB
03—135
(Third—Party Pollution Control
Facility Siting Appeal)
PCB 03—144
(Pollution Control Facility
Siting Appeal)
vs
Respondent.
NOTICE OF FILING
TO:
Dorothy M. Gunn, Clerk
Illinois
Pollution Control Board
James R. Thompson Center
100 West Randolph Street, Suite 11-500
Chicago,
IL 60601—3218
Bradley Halloran
Hearing Officer
Illinois Pollution Control Board
100 West Randolph,
11th
Floor
Chicago, IL 60601
FAX
312/814—3669
Donald J. Moran, Esq.
Pederson
& Houpt
161 North Clark, Suite 3100
Chicago, IL 6060l~-3242
FAX 312/261—1149
Charles F. Heisten, Esq.
Richard S. Porter, Esq.
Hinshew & Culbertson
P. 0. Box 1389
Rockford,
IL 61105—1389
FAX 815/963—9989
Jennifer J. Sackett Pohlenz, Esq.
175 W. Jackson Blvd., Ste. 1600
Chicago, IL 60604
FAX 312/540—0578
Leland Milk
6903 South Route 45—52
Chehanse, IL
60922
George Mueller, Esq.
501 State Street
Ottawa, IL 61350
FAX 815/433—4913
Keith
L. Runyon
1165 Plum Creek Drive, Unit D
Bourbonnais, IL 60914
FAX
815/937—9164
Elizabeth Harvey, Esq.
Swanson, Martin & Bell
One
IBM Plaza, Suite 2900
3.30 North Wabash
Chicago, IL 60611
FAX 312/321—0990
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that I have on the
30th
day of April, 2003, filed
the original and nine (9) copies of the following document:
RESPONSE TO COUNTY OF KANKAKEE’S RESPONSE ~‘O CITY’S
MOTION TO RECONSIDER DISCOVERY RULINGS
with Dorothy M. ~unn, Clerk, Illinois Pollution Control Board, James R.
Thompson Center, 100 West Randolph Street, Suite 11-500, Chicago, IL
60601—3218, and a true and correct copy thereof was served upon you on
April .30, 2003, by depositing a copy thereof, enclosed in an envelope in
the U. S. Mail at Kankakee, Illinois, proper postage prepaid, before the
hour of 5:00 p.m., addressed as above, and by facsimile to those parties
with facsimile numbers listed above.
Kenr~ethA. Leshen
Assistant City Attorney
City of Kankakee
Kenneth A. Leshen
Assistant City Attorney
One Dearborn Square, Suite 550
Kankakee, IL 60901
615/933—3385
Rag. No. 03127454
ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
CLERK’S
OFFICE
APR
302003
Petitioner,
COUNTY OF
KANKAKEE,
COUNTY BOARD OF
KANKAKEE, and WASTE MANAGEMENT OF
ILLINOIS, INC.
Respondents.
COUNTY OF KANKAKEE, COUNTY BOARD OF
KANKAKEE, and WASTE MANAGEMENT OF
ILLINOIS, INC.
Respondents.
Petitioner,
COUNTY OF KANKAKEE, COUNTY BOARD OF
KANKAKEE, and
WASTE MANAGEMENT OF
ILLINOIS, INC.
Respondents.
KEITH
RUNYON,
Petitioner,
vs.
COUNTY OF
KANKAKEE,
ILLINOIS,
KANKAKEE,
and WASTE
INC.
COUNTY BOARD OF
MANAGEMENT OF
Respondents.
POE 03—133
(Third—Party Pollution Control
Facility Siting Appeal)
CITY OF KANKAKEE,
vs.
STATE OF ILLINOIS
Pollution Control Board
POE 03—125
(Third—Party Pollution Control
Facility Siting Appeal)
MERJ.IIN KARLOCK,
vs.
Petitioner,
MICHAEL WATSON,
vs
POE 03—134
(Third-Party Polluticn Control
Facility Siting Appeal)
PCB 03—135
(Third-Party Pollution Control
Facility Siting Appeal)
PCB 03—144
(Pollution Control Facility
Siting Appeal)
WASTE MANAGEMENT OF ILLINOIS, INC.,
Petitioner,
vs.
COUNTY OF
KANKAKEE,
Respondent.
ILLINOIS
POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
CITY OF KANKAKEE
Petitioner,
)
FOB 03—125
P03 03—133
cOUNT? OF KANKAKEE,
) PCB 03—134
COUNT? BOARD OF KANKAKEE, and
)
FOB 03-135
WASTE MANAGEMENT OF
)
(consolidated)
ILLINOIS, INC.,
)
(Pollution Control
Respondents.
)
Facility Siting Appeals)
RESPONSE TO COtINTY OF K~1(AKEE’S RESPONSE TO CITY’S MOTION TO RECONSIDER
DISCOVERY RULINGS
NOW COMES the CITY OF KANKAKEE,
by and through assistant
City
Attorney, KENNETH A. LESHEN, and responding to the County’s Response to
City’s Motion to Reconsider Discovery Rulings, states as follows:
1. On April 29, 2003, the County of Kankakee, by and through its
Attorney, Elizabeth S. Harvey, filed a Response to City’s Motion to
Reconsider Discovery Rulings with the Illinois Control Board.
2. The Response references and incorporates Affidavits by Elizabeth
Harvey, Attorney at Law, and Charles F. Heiston, Attorney at Law.
3. Since said attorneys responded to the Motion by opening the door
and providing affirmative testimony through their AffldEV~t5r the
Petitioners now have at least ti-ia right to cross examine them on
Affidavits they submitted in support of their Response Brief. Further,
whatever claim of privilege or other objections raised by the County and
said attorneys to providing testimony on the subject of their ex parte
cornjnlxlications has now been waived through the submittal of their
Affidavits arid therefore their depositions should be allowed.
4. After the filing of the City’s Motion, the Petitioners took the
discovery depositicn of Leonard ~Shaky” Martin. Mr. Martin has been a
Kankakee County Board member for 30 years and was previously the chairman
of the Kankakee County Board.
5. In his deposition Mr. Martin testified that Mr. Helstcn had
contact with Waste Management of Illinois, Inc. (hereinafter, “WMII”~
regarding
the conditions
imposed by the County on WMII in the County’s
approval of WMII’s siting application and that he believed that Hr.
Helston made those contacts prior to January 31, 2003 (See, page 23, line
9 through page 25, line 17 of Leonard Martin’s deposition attached hereto
and incorporated herein as Exhibit A)
6. The Affidavits of Atto~neys Harvey and Helstor. deny any
substantive Contacts with WMII during the time period in which the siting
application was pending. WMII’s responses to discovery requests concede
that Donald Morat~i made contacts with the County’s Attorneys regarding
conditions during the prohibited time period. Leonard Martin’s sworn
testimony supports the position that pr hibited contacts were made. It is
precisely this type of factual disput that is best served by scrutiny
through the discovery process.
7. The County proposes that the depositions of these attorneys
should be limited to the specific phone call. Leonard Martin’s deposition
testimony requires that these depositions be taken and that the City of
Kan~akee and other Petitioners be allowed to inquire into the full rar~ge
of contacts referenced by Leonard Martin in his deposition.
Prepared By:
Kenneth A. Leshen
Attorney at Law
One Dearborn Square, Ste. 550
Kan)cakee, IL 60901
815/933—3365
Reg. No. 03127454
;UBMITT~D:
Leshen
Assistant City Attorney
CIT’I POLL~TIONCoNi.’ROL/R~~
.
t-IOT
.
DEPOSITION OE’ LEONARD
MARTIN
-
4/29/03
23
Q.
Do you know whether any County employees
2 had contacts with Waste Management regarding those
3 conditions?
4
A.
I don’t know.
5
Q.
Do you know whether any County Board
6 Members had contacts with Waste Management regarding
7 those conditions?
8
A.
I don’t know.
9
Q.
Do you know whether Mr. Heisten had
10 contact with Waste Management regarding those conditions?
II
A.
I believe that he did.
12
Q.
When do you believe he had contact with
13 Waste Management regardihg those conditions?
14
A.
I think shortly after the conditions were
15 set into effect.
16
In other words, after the County Board
17 passed the siting and the application from Waste
IS Management I think that he was
--
he was told by the
19 County that he could negotiate conditions on behalf of
20 the County Board.
21
Q.
Before January 31st,
—-
let’s focus on the
22 time before January 31st. Do
you know whether Mr.
23 I-(elsten had contact with Waste Management?
24
A.
I believe he was.
EXHIBIT
MARILYNN MROZYNSKI. CSR, KANKAKEE, ILLINOIS
815-439-1390
FAX 815-439-8370
DEPOSITION OF LEONARD MARTIN
-
4/29/03
24
Q.
You believe he did have?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q.
Arid upon what do you base that belief?
4
A.
County Board discussions and meetings.
S
Q.
Okay and
in
the County Board discussions
6
arid
meetings Mr. Helsten was present, is that correct?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q.
And he informed you that he had contact
9 with Waste Management, is that correct?
A.
Yes.
ii
Arid that was in the time period before
12 January 31, 2003?
13
A.
I can’t be sure of that, but I think it
14 was, yes.
15
MR.
LESHEN: Mr. Porter, I’m going to
16 ask you to stop nodding because even if it’s not intended
17 to communicate with the deponent, I still find it
18 distracting. So I’d appreciate it.
19
MR. PORTER: I am certainly not
20 corrimun±catinigwith the deponent. I will face the other
21 direction.
22
MR. LESHEN:
That is
why I phrased it in
23 my dual way of saying it. I just want to make sure.
24
Q.
What information did you
—-
there were
MARILYNN MROZYNSKI. CSR. KANKAKEE, ILLINOIS
815-439-1390
FAX 815-439-8370
DEPOSITION OF LEONARD MARTIN
-
4/29/03
2$
I meetings before I take it then before the Jahuary 31,
2 2003 meeting?
3
A.
I believe there were.
4
Q.
Do you know which meetings those were
5
where that happened?
6
A.
No.
7
Q.
Were you a participant in those meetings?
8
A.
No.
9
Q.
~ho
told you about the meetings?
10
A.
They were at County Board Meetings that
II those things were discussed.
12
Q.
And how did you become aware
that
they
13 were discussed at those meetings?
14
A.
Just by being there and listening.
15
Q.
You were present at the meetings where
16 those things were discussed?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q.
Do you know whether
-—
let me tap into
19 your expertise as the ex-County Chairman.
20
Did there come a point when the County
21 changed its policy to provide for tape recordings of
22 meetings?
23
A.
That had been at
——
that.
has been the
24 modus operandi like for four or five years.
MARILYNN MROZYNSKI. CSR, KANKAKEE, ILLINOIS
815-439-1390
FAX 815-439-8370